Comment

Obedient servants

Posted: Sep 4, 2025 at 10:31 am   /   by   /   comments (8)

Bad decisions are made by folks who believe they have no choice. There is no need to explore alternatives. No need to measure the impact of doing anything other than what they are told to do.

When you feel you have no choice, the decision is made for you. It is much easier on the conscience. But it isn’t leadership.

Every year, the province dumps more costs and more responsibilities upon its creatures— municipal governments. Every year, the burden gets heavier. And every year the province cranks the dial higher—demanding higher service standards and raising the cost of delivering the things it once did. It’s a neat trick.

Meanwhile, the province has steadily retreated from the big infrastructure repairs needed to keep municipalities working. Not so long ago, the province largely funded waterworks, bridges and major road networks. Those days are gone.

The province balances its budget each year, knowing it can pass huge costs onto property taxpayers. Some municipalities compliantly go along, obediently chucking these costs onto their residents. Others refuse. Some can’t. Some muddle along as best they can.

So the province turns to other methods of persuasion. A few years ago, it devised a plan to compel municipal governments to assess the state of their assets—roads, bridges, buildings, waterworks and such. In doing so, it would force local governments to confront the fact that these things were falling apart.

It was a small step from there for the province to demand improvements and a timeline for municipalities to bring these assets up to its new standard.

For many municipalities, it means extracting massive tax increases from their residents and businesses. Somebody, after all, has to pay—and there is just the taxpayer in the end.

But not all municipalities are the same. Prince Edward County has a small industrial tax base. While other communities gather as much as half their property taxes from industrial and commercial businesses, the County collects less than 10 per cent from these sources. Homeowners—many on fixed incomes— fund Prince Edward County.

Another difference: the County has 1,047 kilometres of road—7.72 km per 100 dwellings. The city of Belleville has 1.8 km per 100 dwellings. The County is responsible for a billion dollars of roads. We are not the same as other places.

So it was against this backdrop that Council met all day Thursday to learn the catechism of the provincial gospel.

“All the other kids are doing it.” “It will be phased in over 10 years. Taxpayers won’t even notice.” “If you slice and dice the cost enough, you can eventually compare any tax increase to a cup of coffee (a really expensive gold leaf machiatto, mind you).” “We surveyed your people, and they are good with raising taxes if it means better roads.”

Council learned the mantras and will now go forth with the good word. But they had to skim over some hard truths along the way.

First, the tax hike won’t be limited to a 46 per cent tax hike (phased in over 10 years). This new money is intended for capital works only. The County’s consultant figures that operational expenses—staffing, consultants, supplies and such—will suddenly and inexplicably throttle back to the rate of inflation (about two per cent).

There is zero chance of this happening. The cost of running this municipality has never been tethered to any cost-of-living metric. Shire Hall has never made do with what it spent last year, plus inflation. Never. Most years, increases to the cost of running the business tended closer to double digits than to the CPI. There is no precedent to suggest these costs will moderate.

But the notion is made more absurd when one pauses a moment to consider that higher capital spending will surely drive higher operational costs. More stuff, more work and more rehabilitation means more people, more management, more supplies management, supplies—to plan, manage and oversee all this spending.

Instead of a 46 per cent hike to your tax bill—think higher. Much higher. As this image stews in your mind, consider life in Prince Edward County 20 years ago, when the tax levy was a fifth of the amount collected today. A whisper of what it promises to become. Was it so bad?

Same number of residents. Five times greater property taxes. Are you getting value for your higher tax bill? Today? Tomorrow?

Then there is the lingering myth that growth will solve our problems. No one—except self-interested developers— seriously suggests that meaningful homebuilding is on the horizon. Indeed, every market signal points in the opposite direction. A wave of new homes and residents is not coming to save us.

Looming over all of it is the question: Can we afford it? The consultant didn’t have any slides to address that question. Nor did Council ask.

When local government ratchet up property taxes and water bills, it renders our community unaffordable for some folks. When costs ramp up faster than inflation, they eat into our savings, to our enjoyment of life, to our welfare.

How will Council “communicate” blistering high tax increases, on top of blistering high water bills, to those already struggling to pay their bills each month?

“We had no choice” will be a hard sell to an electorate seeking leadership. Few folks voted for a council to capitulate to the province and to developers at every turn. They dream of a local government that charts its own course and learns to live within its means.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca

Comments (8)

write a reply to Teena Cancel reply

Comment
Name E-mail Website

  • Sep 18, 2025 at 9:49 am Teena

    In my opinion, SM REBUTTAL has made two very valid points in his last two lines.

    Here’s a little Fact Check from another resident in PEC covering the period 2019 to 2025. Same Mayor. Same CAO (departed in May of 2025):

    No. of PEC employees earning more than $100K:
    2019 – 19 employees
    2025 – 62 employees

    No. of Directors at Shire Hall:
    2019 – 2 employees
    2025 – 10 employees
    Note: 9 earn over $150K

    Total PEC salaries:
    2019 – 24.3m
    2025 – 34.7m
    Note: 40% increase in 6 years

    It’s your taxes. Think about it.

    Reply
  • Sep 14, 2025 at 8:46 am SM Rebuttal

    Comparing the County with other municipalities is a favourite way to distract from the real issues with Council and Staff.

    The County spends $100 million a year and has a negative net worth of MINUS $55 million.

    For that, we get disruption, terrible roads and constant disruption while contractors dig and pound away to build massive infrastructure to grow the assets of developers and consultants.

    Stop the spending, fire the consultants, freeze the taxes, and right-size County spending. A rural municipality with a population of 26,000 largely made up of retirees, people who work for the County, agriculture, tourism and hospitality — should be nowhere near the level of spending and debt that we are.

    We need a Council and Mayor that will represent County residents and taxpayers.

    Clear them all out and get back to basics in next year’s election.

    Reply
    • Sep 14, 2025 at 11:36 am SM

      Mr Conroy uses comparisons with other communities regularly. In fact he does that very thing in this article. In the past he has compared the cost of our waterworks with that of other communities. He argued that development charges in PEC were too high compared with Quinte West and Belleville. It is a strategy designed to strengthen and focus the argument that he wishes to make. The point that SM Rebuttal misses is the fact that the County is able to operate on tax rates that are substantially lower than those other communities. The taxes currently collected finance the “$100 million dollar budget and service long term debt. You cannot freeze taxes: there is this little thing called inflation that operates all the time. Just to maintain the status quo taxes must increase at the rate of inflation. Even though I may not agree with everything that this Council and past Councils have done, they engaged in what is an obviously thankless task and have done quite well at keeping your taxes down.

      Reply
      • Sep 14, 2025 at 12:40 pm Teena

        It’s a pity, however, that being a retiree, my income does not increase with inflation. And there are more in my situation, than not. While I agree with much of what is being said by SM and Rick, each Council has been responsible for NOT keeping up with maintenance, and spending within the means of the taxpayers of PEC. I want answers BEFORE the next election, from THIS Council, before most of those responsible for not taking care of business, vacate the premises.

        Reply
        • Sep 14, 2025 at 2:37 pm Teena

          Just one more item to take note of – we have had the same Mayor, and many of the same members of Council now since the 2018 election. Exactly what has improved for the taxpayers? Costs go up, I get that – but so has the staffing levels and their attendant costs inflicted on residents that we have no say in. We should only need Shire Hall to house all of Staff and Council – PEC’s population numbers haven’t changed over the decades. I was recently informed by Shire Hall that there are no “Community Conversations” being planned by our Mayor in the near future, where the taxpayers can get information to their questions answered directly, in a public forum, by our elected representatives as we were promised. I would suggest (and I may very well be wrong here – wouldn’t be the first time…) that, if there are more “pressing matters” before the Mayor and Council than these “Community Conversations”, as indicated by his Administrative Assistant, then quite a few of those matters are mostly of this Council’s own making.

          Reply
      • Sep 16, 2025 at 11:12 am SM Rebuttal

        “The taxes currently collected finance the “$100 million dollar budget and service long term debt. ”

        Not factually correct.

        More and more DEBT is what is being used to “finance the “$100 million dollar budget”.

        The servicing of the DEBT is being covered:

        1) partially by property taxes,
        2) partially by Development charges,
        3) partially by Federal and Provincial grants (which are drying up as the upper levels of government are forced to fight the “War of 2025” declared by our neighbour to the south; and
        4) BY MORE DEBT.

        The borrowing the County is doing to cover the ever-increasing expenses, incurs interest charges EVERY DAY.

        And to add insult to injury, the interest is being paid to the Provincial Government — the same people who have forced unwanted, unneeded and underfunded development on municipalities.

        As far as the mention of inflation, the increases in Salaries and other line items in the Operating Expenses are far above the rates of inflation. And so are the increases in tax rates.

        As I said before, and will keep saying:

        Stop the spending, fire the consultants, freeze the taxes, and right-size County spending. A rural municipality with a population of 26,000 largely made up of retirees, people who work for the County, agriculture, tourism and hospitality — should be nowhere near the level of spending and debt that we are.

        We need a Council and Mayor that will represent County residents and taxpayers.

        Clear them all out and get back to basics in next year’s election.

        Reply
        • Sep 17, 2025 at 2:08 pm SM

          To SM Rebuttal: Debt is not used to fund the operating budget. The capital budget includes over $44 million dollars to rebuild County Rd 49. The budget was drawn with the expectation that money would be paid by the Province and the Federal government. The balance of the capital budget plus the operating budget, which includes servicing long term debt is financed through taxation. Multiple sources indicate that the Long Term Debt was taken on to finance infrastructure, i.e. capital projects. There are other sources of revenue that are outlined in the operating and capital budgets. There may be short term borrowing, but that is fundamentally different than long term debt. Clearly we disagree. So be it.

          Reply
  • Sep 12, 2025 at 9:16 am SM

    According to this newspaper’s own reporting, the average assessed value of a house in the County is $323,000.00 with a tax bill of $3561.00. The consultant suggests that to properly fund capital investment, taxes would have to increase to $5201.00. (does not include education levy). In comparison a residence in Trenton assessed at that same amount (not including the education levy) actually is taxed at $4967.00 in 2025. Even with an industrial / commercial base considerably larger than that of the County, a Trenton residence pays $1406 more in taxes today. In Belleville that bill would have been $5490.00 in 2024 or $1929.00 more than in the County. You should note that the current tax bill in Trenton this year is only $234.00 less than the amount proposed for the County in TEN years and as can be seen Belleville already pays a few hundred dollars more than that proposed amount. In 2024 it would have been $4281.00 in Kingston. Still higher than the bill in the County today.

    Reply